When I saw the first series of Mind Mysteries DVDs (four in all) I picked up the first volume, completely enjoyed it, but had no desire to pick up the other disks. The descriptions sounded like magic - and I wanted more of the mentalism that I saw on Disk #1. How little I knew---

This year, my wife presented me with the new series of Mind Mysteries Too (numbering continued from the first set, so these are #5, 6, & 7) and the descriptions showed me that, once again, there was magic mixed with mentalism. But this time, I was not afraid. We'll talk about that in a minute.

First, let's talk about Volume 5, which begins with what at first resembles the hoary old Mental Epic. But wait! It's just a normal chalkboard, and Osterlind just clips some index cards over his predictions. Normal, everything looks normal. And it's so simple and the L & L usual gang of suspects, who you'd think have seen everything, fall apart. And I, who know the "secret," also fall apart. It looks so normal.

Cutlery bends take the stage at this point, and (unlike MM 3) these really *do* fool me. (Thanks to a slight sleight that Richard demonstrates later.) Very much in plain sight, one spoon bends over obediently. He puts this spoon quite literally right under Janelle's (sp?) nose and she sees, as I do, the impossible. And then several forks bend at once, looking for all the world like stop-motion photography of a plant wilting. And, yeah, his explanation makes it look easy. (This is a falsehood. We'll talk about *that* in a minute too.)

The following routine comes from a booklet that Jim & Richard (which sounds like a 1964 singing duo) published awhile ago; it's ancestry is traced to *the Jinx*. I am VERY disappointed that Richard demonstrates "the Very Modern Mindreader" on this disk, because I wanted it kept to myself. Failing that, I'd hoped it would stay with only those performers who could and would read books. Spectators seal their own factoids in little envelopes that are used only by mentalists and banks. THEY seal them; my audiences always insisted that I hadn't even touched 'em when I performed this. And then I would, as Richard does on this video, tell them what's on the card -- and many things which they'd never written. As I said, this began as "the Modern Mindreader" in *the Jinx* -- but now all the weaknesses and possible flubs of the original have been turned into strengths. Even a fumble-fingered klutz such as I have been able to perform this -very- strongly. It's a routine which demonstrates one of Osterlind's greater strengths: the ability to look at an idea, ruthlessly tear it down to its most primal form, then rebuild it with a stronger structure. (Mike Close is also known for this ability. We'll have to make an essay out of this idea some time.)

A strong lesson taught during the explanation is that bold and natural, is safer than safe.

Digital Feedback follows, and it doesn't really fit my style but I'll eventually try it anyway. A calculator is used by various spectators to add various "think of" numbers. Twice, by two different groups of people. And the mentalist has predicted what numbers each group would have. And then he shows he predicted what the total of the two numbers would be. This takes a tremendous amount of chutzpah and showmanship; otherwise the audience would realize that of COURSE he'd know the total if he knew the numbers. But they don't, they just don't, because the mentalist should have them in his/her power at this point.

Aside: Richard's explanation suggests an expensive piece of equipment. I had no problem with a cheap version. I'm such a cheapskate!

Opening the second set, Osterlind walks out with a folded card or piece of paper held in plain sight, never leaving our sight at all. Someone gives him a number, and Richard hands him the card - still folded. Unfolding it, the innocent audience member finds the number that they said. Yes, this is as simple as it sounds. Be surprised at how strongly people react to this. It's great for strolling. This routine was included in TWO books which the aforementioned singing due published. Really, if no one picked up on it by this time, you'd think Richard could have held it back for a few more years.

The Stainless Steel Blindfold is mainly about the prop, which magicians will dismiss and audiences will puzzle over. It's a blindfold routine (What else?) with a high-tech flavor. What you'll see here is the mentalist visualizing a photo that is BEHIND him while he's blindfolded. If you watch this with your spouse, you're liable to hear all sorts of guesses such as "the blindfold acts like a mirror -- but it's too tight around his face. And the angle is all wrong for a reflection to show. That's not possible."

For a couple of bucks, you can make put together the Penomenally routine, where a pen moves without you going near it - and no one can find any threads and it does more than just fall over. Or you can spend another twenty bucks and get the prop from Jim Sisti. What you'll see here is the presentation which takes this beyond just a neat trick, and makes it a real gasper.

And that leads to the final routine on Disk 5: Stopping a Watch. But the watches don't just stop. They change time, sometimes when the mentalist isn't really near the watch. (It's not what you do, and it's not what they think you do, it's what they REMEMBER you did!) At one point, you'll see a watch start spinning like crazy. Oh yeah, you can scare your grand kids with this one.


The explanations on these disks occasionally border on the boring this time. I'm convinced we need the interplay between Jim Sisti and Richard Osterlind; the colorful table and backdrop are needed too. These explanations are effective, but that dark backdrop and empty set just has some sort of lost-in-a-cave claustrophobic feel to it. Brrrr! It gets so much better when Jim joins Richard on camera!

That's a lot said about only one disk. I think I'll take a break, take some insulin, and wait 'til Monday or Tuesday night to write about Disk Six.

....which is actually better than Disk Five and includes my favorite routine. And maybe I'll get around to those two points that I put on the back burner tonight.

*jeep!
--Chet

Thanks for the review, Chet. Very good one.

Mike

Can you explore the metal bending some more?

Thanks!

Specifics, Matt. What specifics do you want? That they're just different enough from PK Silverware to be worth your while? (They are.) That they look almost like different effects? (They do.) That Richard gives out free ice cream to the spectators? (He doesn't.)

All seriousness aside, what is/are your question(s)?

*jeep!
--Chet

Chet,

Thanks for your fine review of volume 5 of Mind Mysteries Too. Let me address a couple of points you mentioned.

The issue about my being alone for the explanations is entirely my fault. For those of you who have never had to do this kind of work, it is a lot more complicated than you might imagine. Setting the lighting and space limitations for the explanations is quite precise. You cannot, for instance, just stand up from a table to do something. If you do, you go out of the light and perhaps out of the camera range. On ETMMM I had some problems with the spirit slate explanations because I was sitting and not standing. (I was never really happy with how that explanation turned out) I knew that explaning the moves for the Ultra Board would be very taxing and I asked to do it alone so that I could make the proper body turns, etc. Since it was set up for that kind of shot, I continued on with the rest of the set in the same way. (It gets better on volumes 6 and 7) But, I agree, it doesn't look as good as it should have. You soemtimes don't know until it is too late how it will turn out. Next time, I promise to be more tuned in to this part of the videos.

Now I want to talk about the calculator routine. I am happy you brought this up as I have given this a whole lot of thought over many, many years. Let me explain.

When I first started into mentalism, I wore out my Tannen's catalog looking for new material. One effect (I forget exactly what one) had its plot something like this. Numbers are chosen and added. First you read the person's mind and then show that you had predicted the number ahead of time. I thought to myself, "That is stupid! If you predicted the number, then what is the point of the mind reading?) And, of course, I still feel that way. For a long time I tried to make all my material - LOGICAL. That is, it had to "make sense" as far as the plot is concerned. Then I saw Al Koran on the Ed Sullivan segment. First he came out with an envelope. He told Sullivan he was going to read his mind. He had him call out a number and the number was on the envelope. Sullivan almost fell over, but I thought, "Wait a minute. That's not mind reading, that's a prediction!" Then he did the countdown newspaper test (like I did on ETMMM) and after he finished with the slip, he did this thing with a phone (really a tape recorder!) where he apparently called Napoleon Solo and Solo told Ed the word on the other side of the paper. Again Sullivan flipped out and I thought, "How stupid is that! If he knew one side of the paper, obviously he must know the other!" Still, this TV appearance was the best press Al Koran ever got in his whole life and a success on the Sullivan show back then meant success in show businesss in general! If Al had not died shortly afterwards, he would have been a much bigger star in America!

With all that in mind, let me talk about this "double effect" deal. If you were to borrow a dollar bill, have someone concentrate on the serial number and you get it - THEN .... show a prediction which has the number on it, it would be dumb! Why mind read when you already know the number.

Now take it a step further. Suppose, instead of the serial number for the predicion, after you get the number the prediction says, " On the back of the bill someone will have written CATHY!" This makes more sense, but some mentalists may feel that it leads the audience to know that a switch was made.

Now suppose the prediction says something like, "The digits of all the numbers on the bill will add up to 31!" This makes even more sense and may add a great climax to the effect. Again, you may or may not agree.

The calculator effect is like that. The whole premise is that the "prediction" is made long before the numbers are chosen. That is not the case, of course, but the routining leads the audience to believe that. So it is a combination of mind reading, then some sort of "feeling" about the outcome. I'm sure some mentalists will think that is not "pure" enough, but from a theatrical standpoint, it plays remarkably! I just finished almost 2 weeks of work (Christmas parties) and every show was close up walk around! (Please note that I get the same fee whether it is close up or a stage show) I used the calculator effect repeatedly and it never failed to cause a sensation. One of the shows was for a very prestigious NY law firm and I can tell you working that one was like working for a room full of "my cousin Vinnies"! It floored them all!

Thanks again, Chet and Merry Christmas!!!

Richard

How clean looking are the spoon and fork bends?

Matt: If you practice (the ever-dreaded essential) your audience will ONLY see the spoon and fork bend right when you want them to. And they will *visibly* bend; it really does look like a camera trick. Just practicing this in front of a mirror looks creepy to me. At one point, Richard puts a spoon flat on his palm and it bends UP, curling, almost inserting itself into Janelle's nose. Janelle is known for expressing astonishment, but she really REALLY looks awed/stunned/scared at the same moment.

Clean? There's really nothing to "catch." And you quite boldly do everything while their eyes are on you. Do you remember the scene in PK Silverware where Gerry is looking right at Banachek's hands and doesn't see anything?

Richard: It's been very obvious to me that you studied Koran's philosophy of "just do it and don't worry about it" and, I think, Dunninger also. I was listening to a Dunninger radio show in which he tells a person that they were asking him to predict the future and "no man can predict the future." Four minutes later, he predicted the future, and they loved him for it - never noticing any contradiction. Ditigal Feedback is like that. If I had to put it into a short explanation, I'd say that you (and not just in this one effect) believe enough in your current reality that it convinces all observers that your reality is, indeed, theirs.

Or to put it another way, Cherie (the "I don't like magic" person) said that when she thinks about something you've performed, it flies in the face of reason. But, she says, she then remembers you actually doing it, and it makes perfectly good sense.

It's something some people can do; you're one of them. I can compare it, outside of magic, to someone like Rod Serling, who was able to convince people of the sheer reality of anything he produced -- even when it wasn't Twilight Zone.

Obviously, I need to study Koran and Dunninger much more - but you'll excuse me if I cheat a little, and study your material also?

*jeep!
--Chet

It took me a day longer than I thought, but I'm finished reviewing Mind Mysteries Too Vol 6 now. And it looks like this:

"Something different" is what Mr Osterlind says he'll start the first set with, which is three signed cards to impossible locations. (Miracle Flying Cards being its title.) What makes this really effective, is that it becomes more and more impossible as each location is revealed. Here is a principle that we'd do well to absorb - to go from the believeable to the unlikely to the impossible. Thus will the impossible become, at least, believeable in context even while the mind is reeling. (The 4th Superman movie - the first with Chris Reeve - used this principle to get to an outrageous climax.) Unlike typical card magic, the choosing of the cards Once again, Osterlind blurs the line between mentalism and magic; perhaps he'd prefer the term "mysterian"? Though I don't think he's offended when some say he doesn't do "pure mentalism," whatever he's doing seems pure to his audiences -- and I get the same reactions when I perform his material.

Spirit Writing on Card invokes a thought-of shape onto a card - as a matter of fact, the shape is burned into the card. At first, one thinks he might actually be burning that shape with his lighter, but the reveal shows *that* wasn't the case. As a matter of fact, it's only when some of the burn marks are wiped away that the shape becomes clear. Nicely done, easy to do, but pay attention to the presentation - it makes the difference between real mystery and "ho-hum." (You're getting tired of hearing me stress presentation, aren't you?)

As a throwaway, as this is beginning, he abruptly demonstrates a mastery over fire as he's beginning this routine. He *just does it* as if it's something he doesn't even think about. This is how a real magician/mentalist/mysterian (? I need a new word.) would treat the physical world, and it sharply makes him an "other" in the audience's mind, even while they "know" that he's just a normal mortal. Well, they *think* they know this; there have been too many times when even *my* audiences have been unsure.

(From time to time, I abruptly move from "Richard does this" to "What happens when I perform this." My reasoning is that these are *instructional* videos and we are interested in how well they'll teach us to perform these effects.)

Our next effect could be considered a hypnotic effect as well as a PK thing. It's Multiple Key Bending, and it happense in the hands of an audience member who seems to be hypnotised into feeling the keys actually breathing in her hands, and that she's unable to unclasp her fingers. I'm no hypnotist, and I've convinced people that the same thing is happening. Of course, when she opens her hands, several keys are bent and she actually felt them bending at the time. And - oh boy! - he's able to show, during the explanation, how a potential disaster can actually increase the intensity of this effect!

We saw Richard perform the classic Clip Line on the Easy to Master Mental Miracles DVDs, and we go into the next clip wondering if the classic routine has been improved beyond its need. I don't think so. There are now opportunities for the audience to choose between at least two different clippings, and then to choose either side of the chosen clipping. The empowerment of the audience seems to increase the mystery here, and makes the prediction seem even more miraculous. Knowing the original, it still looks incredibly impossible. Richard points out that one should choose this or the original, based on the audience and the situation of the performance. Either will produce audible gasps; this version works with the more attentive and bright audience.

If you didn't buy *Making Real Magic* the book, you didn't read Osterlind's excellent introduction to the explanation of Amazing Memory Demonstration, in which he states that you perform this effect by *really doing it*. The audience shouts out 20 different items, with details. (Not just a car, for instance, but a car of particular make and colour.) He (and you, if you choose to learn this) not only plays back the list, but can remember any individual item (if they ask for #17, you'll tell them #17) and finishes by relating the entire list *backwards* - AND states whether each item has already been called and checked off.

To further stun us during the explanation, he playfully relates that this comes from Corinda and we should have been studying the basics.

And now I mourn, for Richard demonstrates and teaches StenoESP. Well, one version of it, at least. This is SUCH a powerful routine, and has been SO successful when I've performed it, that I truly mourn that it's out in the open now. He published it in one of his books, which is always a perfect way to hide a good routine from magicians and mentalists. It's simple to see and comprehend. The mentalist predicts and/or mindreads thoughts of one, two, three, and/or the entire audience. Though this can be also done with a steno pad, Richard demonstrates the version using spiral-bound index cards. I have performed this with as few as one and as many as 30+ people, and it has never once failed to astound. And I can't think of how often I've been approached afterwards and asked if I were truly psychic. (Curse me for my honesty! I could have answered "How much is it worth to you?")

What's the difference between a card magician throwing away cards and still having those cards, and a mentalist doing the same thing? I don't know. Maybe you'll say a mentalist doesn't even do such a thing. But I don't think Osterlind's audience makes such a distinction (and I'll have to try this) when he performs Out of Hand and describes a terrible predicament he once "had." It's a funny story, and shows the dilemma an actual psychic would have with real life. And he starts out realizing that, during a poker game, he's dealt himself five aces. He gets rid of one. He still has the same five aces. He gets rid of another. He still has the same five aces. This goes on and on and on, and his frustration level grows. Somehow, he ends up with a Royal Flush in spades. This is a nice turn on the Magician in Trouble and a different "throw one away, still have all the cards" routine. This is more of good old regular magic than mentalism, but he still gets away with it. I'll probably try this at some point, because it looks like so much fun!

Richard then chooses to have a little fun with a magician in the audience. Industrial Strength Link is a variation on the spring-on-ring routine, this time using a coat hanger and not being the old spring-on-ring routine. In short, the audience gets much amusement from the magician who knows spring-on-ring and then finds himself befuddled. It could easily become a mentalism routine by claiming to cloud the mind of the helper. You might not have opportunity to pull it on a fellow magician, but oh BOY is it funny when you can!

Now *here's* something which looks like you're controlling your audience member. A couple of what may have once been "betchas" are combined into Coin Snatch, in which you literally grab a coin from their palm before they can close their fingers. (You start out underneath their hand.) And then you grab a coin off a table before they can, even though they're just a couple of inches away, and you're more than several feet away. Don't use these as effects on their own; they make great change-of-pace effects between other routines.

Card Warp gets turned on its ear with Original Inside Out. This deserves a backstory developed for it, because it's a very visual impossibility. You fold a card into quarters. It visibly turns inside out. To stop it from doing that, you put a big ol' paper clip on it. It still turns visibly inside out, without disturbing the clip. The card isn't gimmicked, really; it's even given away at the end. Again, we've stepped solidly into the realm of magic again -- unless the mentalist is clouding our minds again.

Hm...we really are crossing that line so often, that it's a wonder we have any idea where we are at this point. And the point is that your audience will be - not confused - but mystified.

During the explanations, that black curtain is back, triggering my claustrophobia again. Fortunately, Jim Sisti is more on-camera again, and that chemistry between the two professionals is on-camera also. Watching it now, I can see why Richard wanted to stand with no table earlier. He really does use his hands so much in talking that there is a real possibility he'll smash his hands on the table. (I'm also guilty of using my hands; my mother always threatened to tie my hands so I'd be unable to talk.) And he really is more animated when Jim's on stage with him and, once again, Jim asks the questions that we would if we were there. The straight man rarely gets the sort of credit he deserves (just ask Bud Abbott some eon) and I think we owe Jim a round of applause for representing us, the viewers, so well.

Volume Seven to follow, with an overview and possible essay afterwards.

Exhausted,
*jeep!
---Chet

Excellent review, Chet. I'm hoping to receive this set for Christmas. It's pretty much the only thing I asked my wife for, God love her. I am really looking forward to seeing it.

Some great observations about how magicians/mentalists view things and lay people view things. I used to visit "Penny For Your Thoughts" forum quite a bit but stopped after realizing that there are an awful lot of mentalists who draw a very strict line between mentalism and magic. Not my thing as I believe mentalism and magic can be combined very effectively.

Anyway, great review. Can't wait to read more of your thoughtful insites.

P.S. I, too, mourn over Steno ESP being released on video. I love that effect.

Chet, thanks so much for the very thorough reviews! Undoubtedly, your reviews will result in many others purchasing these DVDs...myself included.

Again, thanks for taking the time!

David

Boy, did I put a LOT of typoes in my 22 Dec review of Volume 6, or what?! I usually do so much better when I write in Notepad, then paste it into a post. Right off the bat, I see that I managed to lose a line in the 2d paragraph. One sentence SHOULD have read something like "Unlike typical card magic, the choosing of the cards seems almost incidental."

Maybe we should just have a contest to see how many typographical errors there are in that post!

On to Volume 7 (at last!!) - and a Question & Answer routine which is also sold separately (but with text and props) under the name of "the Final Answer." I don't
know if it will be the final Q & A routine ever published, but it does manage to be *very* strong and address the inherent strength & weakness (they're the same thing) of Q & A routines, as noted by Bob Cassidy. I can't say *how* it addresses this weakness, but pay close attention, for it's subtle.

A Q & A routine consists of the mentalist answering questions from the audience, questions asking about future occurances in their private lives. MOST - not all - of the time, the mentalist will read their minds to determine their questions, even before he "cold reads" the individuals and then predicts the answer to their question. Upon that skeleton, some of the finest and some of the worst acts have been built.

In this version, Richard methodically proves - without stating so - that he couldn't possibly have seen their written questions. A bold method, there might seem to be a possible method as one views this -- but it's absolutely impossible, and is dismissed almost immediately. With even a passable presentation (though it would not be recommended to try any mentalism without rehearsing a more-than-passable presentation) your audience suspends their disbelief with wild abandon, for the presentation lends itself to excitement. (See previous comment about the inherent strength of the Q & A: "She's going to answer MY question!!")

One VERY important piece of chutzpah that proves the innocence of the mentalist: Richard frequently stops in the middle of his answering to ask "You didn't write down
(for instance) the colour or price?" or "You didn't write down the number, did you?" type questions.

An EXCELLENT teaching moment occurs when one of Richard's audience members writes a smart-alecky question. With more politeness than is required, Richard answers his
question without stating what the question is, gets the guy to admit the question was answered, then tells him he should be ashamed of himself for asking such a question.

In the Explanations discussion with Jim Sisti, Richard tells how he could have truly humiliated the guy. (DON'T you humiliate anyone either. You never know who has a
gun.) Sooner or later, you're gonna get a smart-aleck like this; now you'll know how to defang them.

"The Final Answer" (Q & A) is only one routine out of twelve on this disk, but we spent this much time on it because it runs deep.

"Test Conditions II" shows another use for the Breakthrough Card System. That's all I really need to say, and I may have tipped too much. But the DVD jacket tells us this is the BCS, so perhaps I haven't. In this case, you "find their card" -- even though THEY shuffle the deck, repeatedly. To show the "bullet-proof"ness of this bit, Richard calls upon a magician to be his guinea pig. Almost as quickly as the fellow hands back the pack, Osterlind pulls out the spectator's card. Boom.

He even gives away the pack of cards afterwards, disproving any stacking or marking.

"Tribute to Tarbell" has the most intriguing title in this series, and lives up to its promise. A subject thinks of their card and ANOTHER audience member puts
their finger on the card - even though member #2 only sees the backs of the fanned deck. Please, PLEASE study the presentation of this -- it more than doubles the impossibility.

"Psychological Impossibility" proves, to me at least, that STRONG magic and STRONG mentalism are very compatable - and may be indistinguishable from each other at times. Jenelle (sp?) just THINKS of a card. The card is definitely in one packet (she verifies this). Frank picks a card from a different packet, which is put in
Richard's pocket. (Scotty has earlier verified that Richard's pocket is empty.) Jenelle's card is no longer in the packet which has never left her (or anyone's)
sight....but it's the card in Richard's pocket. This isn't presented as a card trick nor as a mentalism stunt. It's just done, period. Following "the Final Answer" (as did the previous two experiments) this leaves the aftertaste of having had one's sense of reality unbalanced. See if you can spot a classic (from Tarbell?) subtlety. Osterlind loves the classics, and insists that they are undermined.

And if "P.I." was magic-turned-psychological, what will we make of "Matchbook Prediction"?? Frank picks a card. Osterlind can't quite read his mind, and stops to (ugh!) smoke a pipe and think.

[A side note. You probably didn't know it, but it is a state law in Kentucky that every citizen is required to smoke. At least it seems that way every time I drive to
Louisville.]

Our travelling mentalist tosses his matchbook to the side. Frank feels compelled to pick up the matchbook (Janelle is whispering "no..") -- and the matchbook IS his chosen card.

Frank drops the matchbook on the table. Frank picks another card. The matchbook, which has been laying right there, is now the NEW card. (Janelle *shouts* "NO!")
The audience is wondering if Osterlind has hypnotised them.

Set Nine begins -- ah, Set Nine, where we mix the new with the well-travelled roads, and neither seem to suffer. "ESP Stack" reveals yet *another* hidden gem
(hidden, because it was in print) that looks (Here we go again!) just like the ESP tests that all those 1970s movies and TV shows used. Very Kreskinish, this could be
done even if you and the tester are in separate rooms. And, nope, no one is going to discover any stack. (Don't tell your audience the title of this, OK?)

ODDS, the "Osterlind Design Duplication System" is demonstrated with (of all things) a duplication of a picture that one's audience member draws. No peeks - nothing which even looks like a peek. Like the ESP Stack, it resembles the test conditions which big-time scientists have set to prove or disprove psychic sight. This does not look like a trick, and if you perform it - please give it all the care and attention it deserves.

ODDS *is* a system, as its name indicates, and there are many uses to which this can be put. You'll find a *really* intriguing - and mystical-looking! - use of it
by Greg Arce on Richard's site. No, I'm not going to tell you the URL. For something this good, you ought to do a little work.

We come to an effect which could easily be dismissed as a hoary chestnut. The basic principle is in all those horrendously amateur "Blaine Exposed" e-books that litter
the landscape. Yet, as if to prove to us that exposure cannot kill a classic, Osterlind twists "Ashes on the Hand" enough to make it almost a new effect. Now, it's definitely a psychic marvel and impromptu -- NO forcing!

For fun, you can (again) be in separate rooms. There are several sneaks at work here. If you thought you knew the "Ashes" routine, you might be surprised at how much life is in this. Try not to laugh when he keeps saying "I don't know if this is gonna work or not," as if he isn't in complete control of the situation.

I am almost embarassed to admit that I really thought I knew how to do the Paddle Move. But "Pen Paddle Move" shows me a way to do it in *slow motion* directly under
someone's nose. And to continue in his vein of using everyday objects, Richard demonstrates this with those flat pens that your client may well be giving out at a
trade show you're working. (Which is the case, and the patter, used here.) Since, using these pens, one can give them out as samples (or advertising!) it's funny to
watch people rubbing them, tapping them, clicking them - all in an attempt to make them change as they've just seen them do!

There's not much which can be discussed here (without tipping the method); it either works well, or not at all. It works very well indeed.

"Dad's Favorite" is a quiet, unassuming Four Aces routine which doesn't pretend to be mentalism. What it provides is opportunity to practice audience management and
humour. It provides a nice break, and is a useful in-betweener so that everyone can catch their breath. The real star of this routine is the back story. It doesn't go for the "tug your heart" as Copperfield's Four Aces routine did; this gives you a pleasant, homey feeling. I think you'll like it.

And yet ANOTHER of those great pieces from a book shows up! You're probably familiar with the "Haunted Key" gimmick - but what if you did it without moving at all,
not one muscle? What if you convinced yourself that you really were using the power of your mind to move something? Aw, now I've said too much ---! Using this technique, I've had little problem in moving the key in someone ELSE's hand. Learn this principle, and you learn a LOT more magic than just this one effect.

Richard then demonstrates - and later shows how to build - one of his popular effects called "Solid Ghost." Don't expect this to be Glorpy. The patter backstory builds a
"creation of reality" which develops into something solid and round, very much like a baseball, which appears under a handkerchief. Thump it with something; it thumps.
It's solid. Your spectator feels it. It grows and, just when you think you can get ahold of it, it's not there. And we're told "it was never there" at all.

A good portion of this disk isn't "pure" mentalism at all, but you'd be cheating yourself if you dismissed this portion. The title of the series is "Mind Mysteries" and that mystery definitely happens in the audience's mind.

Pay VERY close attention to what Osterlind teaches during the explanation for "Pen Paddle Move." He's very passionate about magic & mentalism, and he insists that
these things can and should be done as if they're the highest of art. His passion is on display when he mourns a magician he saw who made something beautiful into "just
a cheap trick." During this explanation, he also teaches how to utterly disarm someone who says they know how something is done.

Once again, I'm grateful that Jim Sisti is there to make this an almost interactive conversation during the explanations. During the explanation for "Dad's Favorite," he actually seems to be second-guessing what I would do if I was there.

It's almost incongruous that "the Final Answer" starts this disk. It's so powerful that it overwhelms the fun little routines which finish up the home stretch. (Though I'd argue that Haunted Key is just as powerful.) A wise person would remember that these DVDs are for teaching, and would create an act from these effects. That's what routining is all about: making one effect flow smoothly to another, and for it all to tie together into one great whole.

Which of course, leads us back to the classics and Tarbell's excellent instructions for routining an act. I am beginning to think that Richard is on a mission to lead us to Tarbell and beyond.

*jeep!
--Gran'pa Chet

Now I can catch my breath and ask a question which has puzzled me since November. Where in blazes does "Test Conditions" ONE appear? The jacket for MM Too Vol 7 speaks of "Test Conditions II" being a sequel of sorts to "Test Conditions" and says it was on the original MM DVDs. I've gone through and gone through those DVDs, and haven't found anything with that title.

Could this be the routine entitled "Challenge Mind Reading" on Vol 2? Richard uses those words, but not as a title to an effect. For a memory jogger, "Challenge Mind Reading" is the routine with Cassandra (who is cleverly disguised as Brittany).

*jeep!
--Gran'pa Chet

Hey Jeep,

Thanks so much for your great reviews!!!.Yup Im pretty sure test conditions 1 is indeed "Challenge Mind Reading"on Vol 2.Have a great weekend Sir and thanks for putting so much time and work in writing your very well formulated pieces!! Have a fantastic weekend!

Pete

>>And if "P.I." was magic-turned-psychological, what will we make of "Matchbook Prediction"?? Frank picks a card. Osterlind can't quite read his mind, and stops to (ugh!) smoke a pipe and think.

[A side note. You probably didn't know it, but it is a state law in Kentucky that every citizen is required to smoke. At least it seems that way every time I drive to
Louisville.]<<

I'm from Western Ky and also smoke a pipe...and do mentalism...and, yes, Richard and I have been seen together. (we're not the same guy)..

I have to say this...Richard was hidden away in a cave so long and after all these years, to come out and give us so much great stuff... mentalism and mentalists are all the better for it..

Rick

Wow, thank you so much Chet for your awesome reviews on MM DVDs. Because of your reviews, I am no going to wait till my birthday to get them. I am making my order tomorrow!

Wow, tnx for this excellent review. I too have vol 1 and my gf was asking what bday gift I wanted? so I guess that's answered now... the whole series. hope it reaches me soon

Does anyone know where we can get slencil pens in the UK?

Hi

I have all 7 DVDs and I have to say they are just so great!
The new spoon bending routines are really good.

I do the spoon on palm from time to time. People will be totally floored as they don't see you touching the spoon or anything

Phil

I have to put my two cents in on "My Father's Favorite.. I was fortunate enough to see Richard perform at SAM #168 back in 1991. One trick that I started using that night, and has remained a regular part of my routine is "My Fathers Favorite". This kills performers and laymen alike.

In fact, I just got back into magic after a break and last month attended two different IBM Ring Meetings. I wanted to show I was not just a watcher, but a contributor, so I did MFF (and a few other things). Jaws dropped. This is a real gem.

Overall, I am absolutely delighted with Richard's DVDs, and even though I will not use everything from every DVD, I have never come across a better value than his work.

If anyone is still watching this thread, please chime in, because I would be glad to review some of the effects, and tell you which I think are really strong, and which are not. I would really like to have someone convince me that something I think is weak or a problem really is strong. In fact, in a moment I will be watching ROMM7 with my wife and kids (performance videos only) to get their impressions on the effects.

TWO HOURS PASS...

OK, I am back. Great insight from wife, and three kids (ages 15, 13, and 10). The two youngest (boys) liked almost everything. The girl (15)was more particular, and her opinions more closely matched her mothers. Some of the things I had concerns about we agreed on (Design Duplication - Some of the logic that Richard uses in explaining the effect was the same as the weaknesses that the wife and daughter presented in why they did not care for it.) Others that I felt were hokey (Ashes), were thoroughly enjoyed by all.

I guess it really comes down to taking stuff you belive in, stretching yourself with some new stuff, and getting out there and seeing what works. That is where the fun is anyway.

Mike

Mike: Exactly! You've realized one of the great keys - When you utterly believe in something, the audience will too. And making it "yours" (i.e. - individualizing it to match your performance and vice versa) is absolutely necessary to raise it to that level of wonder.

Would you explain the weaknesses that your wife and daughter found in Design Duplication? I'm wondering if it's an individual thing or a camera thing, because it's always worked for my audiences.

*jeep!
--Grandpa Chet